New to DVD: I, Frankenstein

I, Frankenstein, the recent would-be blockbuster starring Aaron Eckhart as one of the most famous monsters in history, is almost as stitched together as the monster himself.  On the most obvious, surface, level (so obvious that it's difficult to ignore even when we are aware of what's just below that surface) it's just another special effects-laden action extravaganza, no better or worse than a dozen others that have come before it, with its exceedingly simple plot -- a war between angels* and demons -- existing merely as an excuse for lots and lots of CGI and fight scenes.  All of these special effects and fight scenes are well done, mind you, so if that's your kinda thing (I have to admit it's often kinda my thing too) then this movie will hit the spot, as entertaining but forgettable as a pizza dinner on Friday night.

The one aspect of the film that distinguishes it from so many others of its type is the central character, the Frankenstein Monster, who, as written by Kevin Grevioux and Stuart Beattie, bears less resemblance to the lumbering Boris Karloff imitators, and more resemblance to the literary character, an articulate, intelligent being who challenges our definition of the human condition.

Despite the thrill-a-minute, roller-coaster ride feel of the film, the writers do take care to really capture the essence of the Frankenstein Monster as originally conceived by author Mary Shelley.  The central question addressed is whether the Monster has a soul.  As in Shelley's book, the characters in this film, including the Monster himself (here named "Adam"), all assume that, because the Monster was made by artificial means -- by man and not by God -- then he cannot possibly be human or have a soul.  (The writers do an excellent job of a seemingly impossible task -- of having all the characters, both sympathetic and villainous, unanimously agree with these assumptions, and yet still leave the viewer plenty of room to doubt their conclusions.)  This idea, that the Monster is an intelligent, self-aware being that doesn't have a soul, leads to further questions repeatedly asked by the film:  Can a soulless being possibly have or develop a moral center that extends beyond his own self-interest?  Does the soulless being have a right to life as valid as those of ensouled beings (humans) or are his rights somehow automatically "lesser than," due to his purely artificial nature?

All of this stuff, even as embedded in the fantastical as it may be, makes for truly intriguing thought exercises.  Seeing as the dialogue goes to the trouble to ask these questions and address these dilemmas, and seeing as the treatment of the central character is so true to his classic, literary roots (to the extent that there are times when this seems a legitimate sequel to Shelley's original novel), it's almost a shame that character and dialogue take back-seat to all the whiz-bang action and effects.  I suppose that if Guy Ritchie and Robert Downey, Jr. can simultaneously turn Sherlock Holmes into a modern-style action hero and yet still insist on a degree of fidelity to the original source, then Stuart Beattie and Aaron Eckhart can do the same with the Frankenstein Monster, as absurd as the very idea may sound.  The more you think about it, the less sense it all makes, but ah, there's the most central question of all:  When watching a movie like this, how much are you really supposed to think in the first place?  "Not at all"?  "Just enough to catch the second layer"?  "With an analytical and philosophical mind-set"?  I guess the makers of I, Frankenstein were hoping to appeal to those who would give any of those answers.  The movie still works as the mindless entertainment it pretends to be.  But there's just enough intelligence hidden inside to make me wonder what Shelley would have thought of it all.

*Yeah, yeah, I know, they're technically gargoyles and demons.  But come on.  The gargoyles are clearly playing the role traditionally played by angels.

20 Million Bees

Late Tuesday night, I read a news story about a car accident in Delaware.  (http://metro.co.uk/2014/05/22/bees-delaware-20-million-bees-escape-from-overturned-truck-in-newark-on-interstate-95-4736600/)

What made this accident news-worthy was that a truck hauling a shipment from Florida to Maine overturned onto its side, causing its contents to spill out of the truck and cause an even-more-than-your-usual-accident ginormous traffic incident.  The cargo -- 20 million bees.

I've now read three different news stories about this incident, and, intriguingly, not one of them mentioned the obvious question, just who in the heck needed 20 million bees to be transported to Maine in the first place?  As someone who is terrified of bees, my first and immediate assumption (admittedly based more on emotional reaction than on logical thinking) was that someone clearly has a grudge against the great state of Maine.  Thus, the following dialogue occurred in my brain:

Eliot Cutler: So, Maine wouldn't elect me to the governor's seat, eh?  Well, I'll have my revenge!  Yes, just wait and see, fellow Maine citizens, and tremble at the horror that awaits!  Mwa-ha-ha-ha-haaa!

henchman:  Sir, we just received word that your attack bees have escaped somewhere in Delaware!

Cutler:  Curses!  Foiled again!

And while that dialogue may seem ridiculous, it's surely no more ridiculous than the concept of 20 million bees in the first place.  I mean, I literally cannot comprehend that many bees.  I'd hate to be the people in the car two vehicles behind the accident as they gradually realized their predicament.

Henry:  Dammit, Martha, it looks like this accident is gonna hold up traffic for a while.  I guess we're stuck here.

Martha:  Look, Henry, a bee!

Henry: That's nice, dear.

Martha:  Look, another one!  And another!  And another!  Henry?

Henry:  Oh dear sweet mother of Jesus.

To me, one of the most intriguing aspects of the story is that Delaware has actually had a contingency plan in case of massive bee attack since 1995.  To me, this is admiringly specific.  I can only imagine the committee meeting where such a plan was born . . .

Director of Public Safety:  Okay, well, gentlemen, I think we're almost finished.  Let's see, we've got emergency contingency plans for earthquake, fire, flood, hurricane, tornado.  Hmmm.  Has it occurred to anyone here that we don't have any emergency plans for a massive bee invasion?

committee secretary: Excuse me, sir?

director: Well, what if we were suddenly attacked by bees?  And by bees, I don't just mean a few, of course.  But what if we, for some unforseen reason, suddenly got attacked by millions and millions of bees?  Think of the chaos that would ensue without a contingency plan in place!

committee member:  Uh, sir, do you have any idea how bizarre that fear is?

committee member 2: Yeah, sir, I really don't see that happening.  What are the chances that Delaware is going to suddenly be attacked by millions of bees?

director: Dammit, we are not leaving here, people, until we have a contingency plan for a massive bee attack in place!

30 years later

director: Ahhh, vindicated at last!